Screw Mercy

[icy timber]

Litteraly the reason for up to 40% of all airborne problems
Burn it down, vaporize it, beat it to death with the Raiding club, stab it with a bayonet, run it over with SHT, simply remove it, give us a normal flattop, make WR land based, give collies simmilar turnfighter. The Mercy shall BE GONE.

Sorry for a bit of a rant

[brittle plover]

horse and quarter it

[fallow iris]

Me not understand how longhook 2.0 is 40% of airborne problems

[icy timber]

Well….seafighter (self explanatory), future warden plane designs, less focus on problems like public planes on Poseidon

And more

[fallow iris]

I'm meming about it not being a carrier I'm not being serious

Aka the longhook 2.0 name

[lunar moss]

poor mercy didnt detherve this T-T

[icy timber]

It shall burn in hell

[lunar moss]

devs forced her to be seaplane tender, she wanted to be carrier, she wanted to be useful T-T

[icy timber]

Simple, scrap the design, put a landing deck on top and keep the name

Maybe something like this?

Oh wait no, that would allow TB to take off

[lunar moss]

it would not if it will not allow to collect enough speed

or devs can just straight up restrict it

[icy timber]

Yea

[soft violet]

Why can the sea fighter dumpster a real fighter? Because if not then there’s no point to the mercy tender. Maybe if the sea fighter couldn’t takeoff/land at airfields it would be balanced but 99% of seafighters have never been used on a mercy

[icy timber]

The humble barge

[uncut nexus]

White Raven is the best Fighter of all, and warden scout plane is also the best SctPlane of all, which both get boosted by having a Mercy nearby to refuel, repair and rearm close by, why would you remove an Asset that makes both the most powerful planes in Foxhole even more powerful. Besides is a mobile Coastal Gun when anchored.
Mercy is an OP asset in the knowledgable hands.
The Harbinger Fighter's new 14.5mm ablility to disable tracks on Vics will make it same if not even more oppressive than the Colonial Dive Bomber against tanks.
The Harbinger being half cheaper than DBs and not being able to be as omnipresent by not having a flat carrier platform sounds balanced.

[turbid rain]

I definitely think they could have done a bit more to try to make the seafighter less prevalent on/over land. If it's supposed to be used at sea (primarily, or only), give it a takeoff penalty on regular runways in its fuel consumption.

Make getting the seafighter TO a Mercy not so painful, i.e. further safeguards against flipping from colliding with boats, and make taxiing on water almost free in terms of fuel.

Tie the seafighter more closely to being optimized for take-off on water or catapulted by a Mercy

[soft violet]

Be devs
Give collies a cool carrier
Decide to not piss off wardens (real people)
Make seaplane aircraft insanely busted to justify Mercy
Annihilate game balance and invalidate entire colonial air doctrine
The vision

[lunar moss]

i dont think harbringer will be able to just track each and every tank, unless track chance will be higher then in highwayman

also mercy is just big barge

[turbid rain]

I can confidently say nobody on the warden side that I know asked for the torpedo bomber fiasco nor the seatender disparity. I put this entirely on the devs not knowing their game

[lunar moss]

they want more asymmetry just for sake of asymmetry, not understanding what asymmetry is good, and what is bad

[turbid rain]

(That, and them completely ignoring 9 months of game feedback relating to the pre-Airborne updates as they tunnel visioned on getting Airborne out the door)

[uncut nexus]

With a Coastal Gun

[lunar moss]

longhook can do the same

[turbid rain]

Longhook can't repair, refuel and replace parts with a crew of 3 total. Longhook also will not get stuck 'unable to undeploy its cranes' when you try to leave, forcing you to dial dev 911 to get out of the hot zone

[urban mist]

the track chance is 0.25, it will not

[urban mist]

and yea the lh does it better

hell now it refuels and rearms better aswell

[uncut nexus]

Yeap, asymetry requires knowledge and first hand User Experience and battle test of assets for prolongued time. Wich devs refuse to participate. Thats why is become a nightmare for them but most for the playerbase

[lunar moss]

no, not even that

first of all its no tools that could do same job

torpedo bomber and dive bomber are fundamentally different tools, they are not equivalents

same as seatender and carrier

talos and lordscar

[turbid rain]

I refuse to believe that none of these issues were signaled during devbranch. One of the fundamental issues leading to this fiasco is them not listening to feedback. They can claim they're listening all they want, the fact that they made all of Airborne essentially dependent on heavy trucks and modified trailer production makes it crystal clear they gave no fucks about any feedback relating to towing in the last year

[urban mist]

what was signaled?

most of this was repeated ad nauseum theyre just not fast to solve issues

[uncut nexus]

the TB and DB faction exclusivity is not asymestry, thats just bad game design, same as the initial experiment of Sub and DD faction exslusivness, and lessons are still not being learned, or learned only until they got review bombed like never before

[turbid rain]

Fighter balance disparity. Mercy cranes deadlocking and not letting you unanchor to leave. Torpedo bomber being broken. Towing being an absolutely miserable mechanism since their encumbrance changes in the infantry update. None of it was processed or acted on.

[urban mist]

i mean, it was not and was never intended to only ever be one side gets one

[urban mist]

wildly the fighter balance problem came from a mid devbranch thing that like... the seafighter sucked

it was just bad

[turbid rain]

You call it not so fast to process issues. I call it poorly structured devbranch phases and shutting your ears (eyes) for a literal year to towing feedback.

[urban mist]

i am gonna point out the mercy cranes dont deadlock anymore aswell, that never hit live

[turbid rain]

Devman essentially loaded a nuke, and asked the community if it was good to go when they'd already pressed launch (started devbranch with less than a month till release)

[urban mist]

i wont disagree devbranch was too short, but airborne at the start and at the end were very different issues wise

[turbid rain]

There was apparently no room for LISTENING TO FEEDBACK that said the torpedo bomber is literally jsut a BAD IDEA

[urban mist]

they did nerf it

multiple times. they just didnt remove it

because that would be actually a whole new level of fucked

[turbid rain]

Oh yeah? Because that would force the navally dominant faction to use their superior submarine to achieve the same thing which they have been doing capably for 20? 30? wars already?

[urban mist]

because that would be making one side have a new bit of content removed, leaving them with only fighters and bombers mid devbranch, while leaving the other

tldr: biblical firestorm

[turbid rain]

That would indeed be a much worse fate than removing something completely unbalanced so that the other team makes almost ANY ship except submarines during the update war

I couldn't care less. Remove it now.

[urban mist]

theres a reason your not a dev.

[turbid rain]

(Warden loyalist and navy enthusiast, for the record)

[uncut nexus]

TB is a ghost of what is used to be, is not gonna be a deterrent for collie naval to play with big ships anymore.
DB also got less oppressive, and i would argue that the Harbinger 14.5mm disable track is gonna be same or more oppressive than DB, as how cheaper both the Fighter and the ammo and rearm mechanism is than the DB. Harbing 14.5mm is that good at disabling tracks now.

[urban mist]

that is so much worse of a decision

the tbs pretty good

medium holes and a chance of a large one is like, solid enough to mean its in the midline

[lunar moss]

change torpedo on bombs is not that hard...

[urban mist]

the harbinger track chance on average is 5% per shot

[turbid rain]

There's a reason these devs managed to tank their active playerbase following their update launch by over 80%. Sunk cost fallacy and no understanding of how the systems they created interact on the battlefield

[urban mist]

maybe, but like, we dont know how big of an ask codewise that is

[lunar moss]

i would like to see how it plays out first

[uncut nexus]

I tested the Harb 14.5mm and it felt way better than that. Its a viable disabling tank tool.

[urban mist]

it is 5%

like, it is not that high

[turbid rain]

It would have been better to replace the TB torps with mammons on launch to avoid this fiasco ngl

[urban mist]

it changes depending on the tank

but at best its 7%

[uncut nexus]

Im telling you that 5% sounds bad on paper but on real dive shooting its real good

[turbid rain]

At least that would have signaled the truth to the playerbase: It's not done cooking

[urban mist]

i used it too, it really aint

[lunar moss]

change "torpedo" on "shrike bomb"...?

and a little different model

[lunar moss]

its PvE

[urban mist]

we dont know if theres weirdness like what forces hv to not be possible on arty

[lunar moss]

ton of harpas xd

[urban mist]

its like how we only found out how accurate the flight model was this devbranch

[lunar moss]

then create new plane, and import model of torpedo bomber

dive bomber works just fine

[urban mist]

we know thats not a fast process, so its kinda the problem of not fast to solve problems again

[lunar moss]

its same dive bomber, but with different model

[turbid rain]

a high raremat platform capable of delivering 2 mammons. I'm sure that would have made it clear it would remain non-viable for another 6-9 months, just like the Jester on launch

[urban mist]

the estimate we have from them is about 2-3 weeks to make a tank and test it, more for planes and ships, given the model exists we can assume about 2..... for a devbranch they cant really delay again

[urban mist]

how to piss off one side of the game in one easy step

[turbid rain]

Instead, piss off the entire community and specifically the side with no morale that takes any suggestion of imbalance as an excuse to stop playing at the 25 day mark

[urban mist]

i think your quite wildly exagurating how much the tb damaged the game. it was bad yea, not that bad

[fluid slate]

There are no medium holes tho

[urban mist]

ill get you the flow rate, but they are actually worse than normal

[fluid slate]

If there are medium holes....

Why does it not say that in the patch notes

Look at devman

[lunar moss]

wait wait wait

so we have large hole > standard leak > small leak???

[fluid slate]

Its just them saying large and small hole in a weird way

[urban mist]

cause legally theyre not a new type of hole

[urban mist]

we have large -> small* -> small

[lunar moss]

ok then
large hole > standart hole (the most not standart) > small hole

[urban mist]

yea

[fluid slate]

If its like that then devman has skill issues with being clear in their patchnotes